You are hilariously wrong.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
All Three Major U.S. Carriers and Google Adopt Rich Communication Services, But No Sign of Apple Interest
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You are hilariously wrong.
At this point does Apple really need iMessage lock in to secure iPhone market share?
Users should buy an iPhone because they want to use an iPhone. Because it is a great product (I'm not an iPhone user yet but I honestly think iPhone is a great product). They shouldn't make that decision based whether or not they will be able to communicate easily with their mostly Android or mostly iPhone contacts. Just use an open standard so everyone can freely pick the platform they prefer.
Users should buy an iPhone because they want to use an iPhone. Because it is a great product (I'm not an iPhone user yet but I honestly think iPhone is a great product). They shouldn't make that decision based whether or not they will be able to communicate easily with their mostly Android or mostly iPhone contacts. Just use an open standard so everyone can freely pick the platform they prefer.
That’s because it is not a standard and Apple hasn’t positioned it as one. It’s a feature of the iPhone (and now macOS). Why should Apple just give away a competitive advantage it has over Android/Google?
Not outside the US, for example almost no one uses SMS here in Japan. It’s all Line or Viber or iMessage.
One of the reasons it’s a great product is iMessage. Why should Apple abandon that? If you want to communicate with Android users you can, people are free to pick right now. Apple not porting iMessage to Android does nothing to prevent anyone from buying an Android device. It’s a choice based on preference and weighing the pros and cons, not a gun to someone’s head.
This brings up a good point. Even though person to person texting would be encrypted with this new protocol, what would happen with the shortcode texts that companies send out? Or the two factor SMS texts that get sent out? Would those somehow adopt RCS as well?
It absolutely sent text messages. The SMS App was there from day one. MMS support was added in OS 3.0
Apple can only go so far with their failed iMessage expansion attempt, and it wont pickup any more traction outside of US.
Not saying they should support RCS, just say all they care really is mumbling rumbling PR xxxx and money, and that’s it. Security of individual customers ain’t important, as long as PR team keeps saying “we care about security”, many will choose to believe.
Not saying they should support RCS, just say all they care really is mumbling rumbling PR xxxx and money, and that’s it. Security of individual customers ain’t important, as long as PR team keeps saying “we care about security”, many will choose to believe.
Next iPhone connects to Elon’s Starlink satellites. Why would apple care about outdated communication approach.
Big 3 are phasing out from our lives. Dump their stock.
Big 3 are phasing out from our lives. Dump their stock.
Uhh...
"WhatsApp Messenger, or simply WhatsApp, is an American freeware, cross-platform centralized messaging and voice-over-IP service owned by Facebook, Inc."
Again, if you want to make the thread conversation exclusively about the protocol/standard or whatever you want, go right ahead. But in a most incredibly unusual circumstance for MR/posting boards, a number of the thread replies will be on topics directly related to the main topic . "Security" was mentioned in the article, "security" was replied to, there is an element to security in the "standard", it's a topic that matters to me, Google's view on privacy data security is germane to what Google may be endorsing. Because, gee, the biggest data mining monetizer in the world, Google, including mining common words and phrases a user types, yea why would that be relevant to what Google endorses as a standard users type words into.
If you don't like that topic or don't think it's a fair comparison, great, feel free to disagree or not read/reply. Simple. OTOH, I'll pass on your quasi demand the thread be only the discussion you think is appropriate.
RCS is an optional part of the GSM specifications now and they will almost certainly bring in E2E encryption at some point. It will also become mandatory and Apple will have no choice.
Here is what appears to be a slide from the 2019 October 24th GSMA RCS event: Apple and RCS. Is the slide real? I don't know, but in any case Apple almost certainly already have something brewing internally and they usually take their time with these kinds of things and wait for it to mature.
They are in no hurry but they will either bring it out when GSMA mandates it or if we're lucky when they think it's pervasive in the marketplace.
RCS is still kinda nacent and for example while Samsung Messages supports RCS, only Google Messages supports the new E2E Encryption, etc. It's still a bit messy but this development that all three US carriers will standardize on RCS by 2022 will create a lot of pressure for Apple to get on board.
They also face pressure from RCS for Business.
Here is what appears to be a slide from the 2019 October 24th GSMA RCS event: Apple and RCS. Is the slide real? I don't know, but in any case Apple almost certainly already have something brewing internally and they usually take their time with these kinds of things and wait for it to mature.
They are in no hurry but they will either bring it out when GSMA mandates it or if we're lucky when they think it's pervasive in the marketplace.
RCS is still kinda nacent and for example while Samsung Messages supports RCS, only Google Messages supports the new E2E Encryption, etc. It's still a bit messy but this development that all three US carriers will standardize on RCS by 2022 will create a lot of pressure for Apple to get on board.
They also face pressure from RCS for Business.
I can see Apple adopting this. What I don’t expect to see is Apple making any sort of announcement about it until rollout is imminent. So, everyone holding their breathe for Apple to make an announcement any sooner should probably start breathing again.
And here it goes again with 'it doesn't matter, they all do it, it is all the same' misinformation. You putting it in a new way "our stuff isn't really private with either" was mildly clever though. A good sugar coating of the same verifiably bogus claim.
1. Yes, total privacy is not currently possible. So why bother, they're all the same. The huge degree and breadth of difference in data privacy compilation doesn't matter at all. They'll get something, you can never be private -- "our stuff isn't really private with either".
2. Yes, an app you choose to install and open almost certainly will collect a category or another of privacy data. So "our stuff isn't really private with either". Sure, the ability of the app on one platform to then track you very widely across all other apps -messaging, maps, call log, contacts etc etc doesn't matter.
3. "It's not like Google is hiding it"? They certainly don't hide in their P/L the huge data monetization as an advertising revenue line item. The more privacy data they collect the bigger that line item, their by far biggest line item. Certainly their consistent terming of privacy data collection as "user experience" as well as fighting one's ability to see and delete the massive data collected(see EU for that) -- yes, Google certainly is honest and open. I'm sure every average user knows how much private data Google collects. Honest as it comes.
4. The general point of Apple just started doing it, Well there you go, it's only been a year or whatever. I think it was early 2019 when they let Facebook know and Facebook then wanted to make Apple feel pain". Sure, it is odd you noted Google's honesty virtue while questioning Apple's motives because it was only recent -- especially when your point is they're all the same. Maybe Apple will one day be honest about it like Google, right.
Here's some shade for you all. iPhones are not superior to Android phones in every way. Android based have advantages. Up front cost clearly one of them. Far more models to choose from. If you like to do internet based App installation, there is another markedly clear advantage. But on privacy data security, Apple walks away in this category. The two aren't even in the same ballpark, period. You can dress your responses up all you want (and based the history of replies from 'they're all the same' posters, I expect any from you should be interesting). What it factually and indisputably won't contain is evidence that privacy data security 'is the same'. Apple runs away with the victory in this category. Those arguing otherwise just do not like that indisputable fact.
When I used to date. When those first texts came in? If they were green and stayed green. My response was always the same. “Thank you but I don’t think we’re going to work out.”
Not even a bit worried. For the most part, the idea of encryption is cool and all but, I fail to see how, "I'm omw home for dinner" is so private I have to encrypt it
Also not even worried because anything coming from Google is practically half-assed and then ditched like 4 years later by their own leadership.
You can't even get proper support for things like YouTube or a myriad of other services without asking the community.
In the end, the functionality of said messaging system will outweigh it's false sense of security and if history shows anything, the functionality of the Apple product vs the competition will probably make more sense, and if Apple really wants, they could easily do the same thing and let the other carriers use it.
This will probably just be another frivolous lawsuit by someone claiming someone has a monopoly on messaging services lol
Also not even worried because anything coming from Google is practically half-assed and then ditched like 4 years later by their own leadership.
You can't even get proper support for things like YouTube or a myriad of other services without asking the community.
In the end, the functionality of said messaging system will outweigh it's false sense of security and if history shows anything, the functionality of the Apple product vs the competition will probably make more sense, and if Apple really wants, they could easily do the same thing and let the other carriers use it.
This will probably just be another frivolous lawsuit by someone claiming someone has a monopoly on messaging services lol
Is RCS usable on a computer, like iMessage, or do I need to go and grab the phone and use its tiny keyboard like I do for SMS?
No.
SMS/texting used to cost money to send. When I got my first GSM phone, SMS were about $0.25 each, and 140 characters limit.
Those days are long gone, but that charge made users move to other messaging using data instead as soon as they could. No, data was not free, but even at the lowest possible tier at the time, you could send a lot of messages ”for free” compared to paying for each SMS.
It was only after the fact that users moved away from SMS and calls they became ”free” from carriers. Nowadays you only pay for the amount of data you want per month, SMS and calls are just free, since nobody uses that anyways.
Google do not have access to the clear text if the end to end encrypted messages.
The RCS standard includes multi device support.
It seems Google's implementation does not support this capability, but when using Google messages there is a web client that talks direcly to the phone (similar to WhatsApp for web) that you can use on other devices (desktop pc, iPad, other phone, etc)
Between individuals. Group messages not yet supported. There's no switch to turn it on or off: if both devices support it then you get E2E encryption.
It's implemented over the top of the RCS standard (it's not currently part of the standard).
it’s still your voice clear as day and people were listening to these interactions. Sorry that’s not totally anonymous to me anyway.